I have always known that I have trouble making a decision and sticking to it. I am one of those people that listen to an argument and think, "Yeah, I can see why they think that" and then listens to the counter argument and thinks the same thing. It is this "middle of the road" position I find myself in now in regards to the direction my school is taking with their curriculum.
We have been listening to our superintendent talk about standards based education and how we need to make sure all students are being successful. He talks about how some students need more time and that they should be allowed that time instead of passed on from grade to grade when they are not ready. In light of so many of our students not passing standardized tests, this is his solution to increase both teacher and student accountability.
In reading several articles posted on our class Moodle, I have now been exposed to the counter argument. More standards are not what we need, the U.S. is trying to catch up to schools that are in developing countries and are ultimately trying to catch up to us. We are working backwards instead of forwards. We need more focus on HOW to think and solve problems creatively instead of more tests.
I am more confused than ever now because I can see where both parties come from. I can see needing to be accountable for making sure each student has the tools they need to be successful and I can see that we aren't going to get there with more testing. My favorite quote that I got out of a class I took last semester was, "You don't get a sheep to gain weight by weighing it more often." So, out of frustration, I yell to the sky, "What is the right answer???"
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Reshaping Learning from the Ground Up
I know I am bombarding my blog with lost of posts today, but I can't seem to keep quiet.
I just read the article, "Reshaping Learning from the Ground Up" from edutopia.org. It is an interview with Alvin Toffler, an author, about the current state of education. His first comment, "Shut down the public education system." blew me away. I've been thinking, up until now, that we could reshape and rework what we already have going for us, but I can definitely see where he is coming from. His argument is that there is so much wrong with public education today that there isn't a strong enough base to work from. WOW!
My main complaint about the school I am teaching in now is that we are always trying to reinvent the wheel. We rewrite curriculum and programming every year without giving any time to try out the "new" program. In the three years I have been there, we have gone through two spelling programs, two math programs, and now they are looking at throwing it all out again. Although it sounds like we are not "settling" in our curriculum, think of what this is doing to our students. They have no idea what to expect!
I digress though. I am interested in Toffler's idea of what a utopian education would look like. He would have a school open 24 hours a day and based individually on the needs and what is best for each kid. We are expected to do that now with RTI and NCLB but we are not given the time or the resources to do that. He also talks about teachers not being able to do what they know works because of the constraints placed on them by expectations and mandates by the government/powers that be.
I just read the article, "Reshaping Learning from the Ground Up" from edutopia.org. It is an interview with Alvin Toffler, an author, about the current state of education. His first comment, "Shut down the public education system." blew me away. I've been thinking, up until now, that we could reshape and rework what we already have going for us, but I can definitely see where he is coming from. His argument is that there is so much wrong with public education today that there isn't a strong enough base to work from. WOW!
My main complaint about the school I am teaching in now is that we are always trying to reinvent the wheel. We rewrite curriculum and programming every year without giving any time to try out the "new" program. In the three years I have been there, we have gone through two spelling programs, two math programs, and now they are looking at throwing it all out again. Although it sounds like we are not "settling" in our curriculum, think of what this is doing to our students. They have no idea what to expect!
I digress though. I am interested in Toffler's idea of what a utopian education would look like. He would have a school open 24 hours a day and based individually on the needs and what is best for each kid. We are expected to do that now with RTI and NCLB but we are not given the time or the resources to do that. He also talks about teachers not being able to do what they know works because of the constraints placed on them by expectations and mandates by the government/powers that be.
Edutopia Article
http://www.edutopia.org/collaboration-age-technology-will-richardson
In reading the above article for EDC 533, I was struck by the following quote:
"And the work we create and publish is assessed by the value it brings to the people who read it, reply to it, and remix it. Much of what our students learn from us is unlearned once they leave us; paper is not the best way to share our work, facts and truths are constantly changing, and working together is becoming the norm, not the exception."
It brings me back to the idea that traditional education is not working and that we need to make some changes. Although some would argue that we have made substantial gains since the time say my parents were in school in the 50's and 60's, I would beg to offer that the changes are not in direct correlation with the change we have seen in the world. Education has for the most part been a constant. The expectation is the same. Children of a certain age will sit in a classroom for 7+ hours a day, Monday through Friday. They will learn how to read and write and they will be tested on it.
This article brings to light that the things that we have ALWAYS done are not always the best or most productive way of doing it. We appear to be stuck. We have more technology at our fingertips than ever before. We have more access to people across the world, and yet... I bet most classrooms are based on pencil and paper. Why are we so resistant to change and evolution?
In reading the above article for EDC 533, I was struck by the following quote:
"And the work we create and publish is assessed by the value it brings to the people who read it, reply to it, and remix it. Much of what our students learn from us is unlearned once they leave us; paper is not the best way to share our work, facts and truths are constantly changing, and working together is becoming the norm, not the exception."
It brings me back to the idea that traditional education is not working and that we need to make some changes. Although some would argue that we have made substantial gains since the time say my parents were in school in the 50's and 60's, I would beg to offer that the changes are not in direct correlation with the change we have seen in the world. Education has for the most part been a constant. The expectation is the same. Children of a certain age will sit in a classroom for 7+ hours a day, Monday through Friday. They will learn how to read and write and they will be tested on it.
This article brings to light that the things that we have ALWAYS done are not always the best or most productive way of doing it. We appear to be stuck. We have more technology at our fingertips than ever before. We have more access to people across the world, and yet... I bet most classrooms are based on pencil and paper. Why are we so resistant to change and evolution?
Model Schools
I looked at Little Red Schoolhouse & Elisabeth Irwin High School In New York (http://lrei.org/midschool/index.html) and KIPP schools across the country (http://www.kipp.org/).
To compare the two schools, I looked at KIPP and was immediately stricken by the “Word hard. Be nice.” motto at the bottom of the homepage. Isn’t that what we want from all of our students? Effort and a general kind atmosphere? I like how simply put it is and how appropriate for the educational environment.
They have student focused instruction: “balance rigorous curriculum with the joy of learning”. In public education, at least in my school, we have sucked the fun out of everything we do. Because of budget cuts, we have eliminated all the programs that are not “necessary” (read:tested). These programs, including shop and a wilderness survival program were some of the only things keeping some kids showing up every day.
“Over 90 percent of KIPP students are African American or Hispanic/Latino, and more than 80 percent of KIPP students are eligible for the federal free and reduced-price meals program.”
How is it then that our public schools can blame poor test scores and poor engagement on our lower socioeconomic status? My school is very low in terms of socioeconomics. What is the discrepancy here? How can their kids want to be at school and be succeeding, while my students hate coming and resent the fact that they are forced to (even in 5th grade)? I believe that it has something to do with their high expectations. The kids preparing for college have higher expectations placed on them than students meandering through public education just to get through. I want to say that I have high expectations in my class, but what other messages do my students get throughout the rest of their day?
The Little Red School house's Mission statement: “Our goal is to educate students to become independent thinkers and lifelong learners and to pursue academic excellence and individual achievement, in a context of respect for others and service to the community.” Sounds very much like KIPP’s motto of “Word hard. Be nice.” Both programs seem to appeal to getting kids ready for their ultimate role in life, productive citizen. The most surprising thing about this school is that it was considered progressive in 1921 and by contemporary standards it is still so. It is a little alarming to me that in the past 90 years we have not made all that much progress in public education. It still feels somewhat oppressive and kids are just expected to go and “do their time”. No wonder behavior issues arise and people are unhappy in the school environment. It makes me think of how many new teachers, fresh out of college, leave the teaching profession after three years. I always thought this was a high statistic and that I would never consider it. I am working on my third year of teaching and I can understand where they are coming from!
Looking through the basic curriculum outline, I am noticing that there is a focus on engagement through hands on activities. Science and social studies are subjects that kids focus on (which have been all but eliminated from our school due to lack of testing). I like that the lower elementary curriculum focuses on building a community. Without a strong foundation, things can’t be built on top of it. In my school we seem to jump into academics and then try to build community as an afterthought. It doesn’t work and we are banging our heads against the desk wondering why.
The things that the two schools have in common is an authenticity in their education and a high level of expectation from all students. All students are expected to participate and more importantly, they WANT to because of how engaging the activities are! The overall atmosphere of the buildings sounds positive and inspiring and like a place people want to be. This is something that is missing, at least in my school. Both schools offer a wide variety of extracurricular activities such as gymnastics and woodworking, and more academic time like summer school and school on Saturdays. It appears to me that these schools are doing something right and we should be modeling ourselves after them more and more.
To compare the two schools, I looked at KIPP and was immediately stricken by the “Word hard. Be nice.” motto at the bottom of the homepage. Isn’t that what we want from all of our students? Effort and a general kind atmosphere? I like how simply put it is and how appropriate for the educational environment.
They have student focused instruction: “balance rigorous curriculum with the joy of learning”. In public education, at least in my school, we have sucked the fun out of everything we do. Because of budget cuts, we have eliminated all the programs that are not “necessary” (read:tested). These programs, including shop and a wilderness survival program were some of the only things keeping some kids showing up every day.
“Over 90 percent of KIPP students are African American or Hispanic/Latino, and more than 80 percent of KIPP students are eligible for the federal free and reduced-price meals program.”
How is it then that our public schools can blame poor test scores and poor engagement on our lower socioeconomic status? My school is very low in terms of socioeconomics. What is the discrepancy here? How can their kids want to be at school and be succeeding, while my students hate coming and resent the fact that they are forced to (even in 5th grade)? I believe that it has something to do with their high expectations. The kids preparing for college have higher expectations placed on them than students meandering through public education just to get through. I want to say that I have high expectations in my class, but what other messages do my students get throughout the rest of their day?
The Little Red School house's Mission statement: “Our goal is to educate students to become independent thinkers and lifelong learners and to pursue academic excellence and individual achievement, in a context of respect for others and service to the community.” Sounds very much like KIPP’s motto of “Word hard. Be nice.” Both programs seem to appeal to getting kids ready for their ultimate role in life, productive citizen. The most surprising thing about this school is that it was considered progressive in 1921 and by contemporary standards it is still so. It is a little alarming to me that in the past 90 years we have not made all that much progress in public education. It still feels somewhat oppressive and kids are just expected to go and “do their time”. No wonder behavior issues arise and people are unhappy in the school environment. It makes me think of how many new teachers, fresh out of college, leave the teaching profession after three years. I always thought this was a high statistic and that I would never consider it. I am working on my third year of teaching and I can understand where they are coming from!
Looking through the basic curriculum outline, I am noticing that there is a focus on engagement through hands on activities. Science and social studies are subjects that kids focus on (which have been all but eliminated from our school due to lack of testing). I like that the lower elementary curriculum focuses on building a community. Without a strong foundation, things can’t be built on top of it. In my school we seem to jump into academics and then try to build community as an afterthought. It doesn’t work and we are banging our heads against the desk wondering why.
The things that the two schools have in common is an authenticity in their education and a high level of expectation from all students. All students are expected to participate and more importantly, they WANT to because of how engaging the activities are! The overall atmosphere of the buildings sounds positive and inspiring and like a place people want to be. This is something that is missing, at least in my school. Both schools offer a wide variety of extracurricular activities such as gymnastics and woodworking, and more academic time like summer school and school on Saturdays. It appears to me that these schools are doing something right and we should be modeling ourselves after them more and more.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Defining Curriculum
After a brief Google search this is what I unearthed for possible definitions of 'curriculum'
yourdictionary.com defines curriculum as:
1. a fixed series of studies required, as in a college, for graduation, qualification in a major field of study, etc.
all of the courses, collectively, offered in a school, college, etc., or in a particular subject
answers.com defines curriculum as:
1. All the courses of study offered by an educational institution.
A group of related courses, often in a special field of study: the engineering curriculum
wikipedia.com defines curriculum as:
“In formal education, a curriculum is the set of courses, and their content, offered at a school or university. As an idea, curriculum stems from the Latin word for race course, referring to the course of deeds and experiences through which children grow to become mature adults.”
Merriam-Webster defines curriculum as:
1 : the courses offered by an educational institution 2 : a set of courses constituting an area of specialization
After reading through each definition I came across, I would have to say that the idea of curriculum being “experiences through which children grow to become mature adults” as stated on Wikipedia.com. I think that it is our ultimate goal to get kids to be prepared to be productive citizens, informed consumers, and prepared to create a life on their own. Without a well developed curriculum, students leave education with holes in their knowledge that could be detrimental. I like to think of curriculum as being the “big picture”. It is the “why” behind what I do every day. Ultimately we need curriculum to preserve our culture and country.
yourdictionary.com defines curriculum as:
1. a fixed series of studies required, as in a college, for graduation, qualification in a major field of study, etc.
all of the courses, collectively, offered in a school, college, etc., or in a particular subject
answers.com defines curriculum as:
1. All the courses of study offered by an educational institution.
A group of related courses, often in a special field of study: the engineering curriculum
wikipedia.com defines curriculum as:
“In formal education, a curriculum is the set of courses, and their content, offered at a school or university. As an idea, curriculum stems from the Latin word for race course, referring to the course of deeds and experiences through which children grow to become mature adults.”
Merriam-Webster defines curriculum as:
1 : the courses offered by an educational institution 2 : a set of courses constituting an area of specialization
After reading through each definition I came across, I would have to say that the idea of curriculum being “experiences through which children grow to become mature adults” as stated on Wikipedia.com. I think that it is our ultimate goal to get kids to be prepared to be productive citizens, informed consumers, and prepared to create a life on their own. Without a well developed curriculum, students leave education with holes in their knowledge that could be detrimental. I like to think of curriculum as being the “big picture”. It is the “why” behind what I do every day. Ultimately we need curriculum to preserve our culture and country.
Is my school regular?
I am wondering now if I should connect my face to my blog...
My school is "regular" in that we start at 7:30 and get out at 2:30 (I know the day seems long to some of you). We have vacations over Christmas, February, and April, and an extended break over the summer months. I teach 5th grade which has me in an interesting almost middle school-like schedule. Each period is 50 minutes long. I teach ELA (English Language Arts) and have double periods to teach 2 classes. In that 100 minutes I am expected to squeeze in 120+ minutes of instruction.
I started teaching at this school 3 years ago. In the past three years we have had several changes in our administration including a new principal, assistant principal, and superintendent. Our town voted not to consolidate last year and we are now dealing with the repercussions of that. All of these factors compounded has left the teaching staff feeling overwhelmed and frustrated. In addition to these things, we are dealing with new curriculum development and our superintendent is looking at standards based education instead of dividing kids by age. I guess so much is "up in the air" or "in progress" that I am not sure whether I am facing forwards or backwards.
Seeing other teachers in my EDC 533 class talk about their schools and how well everyone works together toward a common goal makes me a little jealous. I wish our school could get to that point. I think we can, but there are several large roadblocks that we need to overcome first.
In terms of our curriculum, we have a curriculum coordinator and a new curriculum binder as of last year. It was developed before Union 90 was disintegrated by consolidation and we were left on our own (by the choice of townspeople). Being a new teacher, I was excited to have something concrete to refer to but have been disappointed with what the binder has supplied me with. It is vague and hard to follow. It seems like the learning result are put in the binder and it is still up to me to decide how to get the students proficient in what they need to know. Although I enjoy the freedom and the ability to be creative, I worry that my students are not getting a full education because of the holes in our curriculum.
I guess I would have to say that on the surface, my school is "regular", but once you dig down a layer or two, we are seriously lacking some things that could make us better.
My school is "regular" in that we start at 7:30 and get out at 2:30 (I know the day seems long to some of you). We have vacations over Christmas, February, and April, and an extended break over the summer months. I teach 5th grade which has me in an interesting almost middle school-like schedule. Each period is 50 minutes long. I teach ELA (English Language Arts) and have double periods to teach 2 classes. In that 100 minutes I am expected to squeeze in 120+ minutes of instruction.
I started teaching at this school 3 years ago. In the past three years we have had several changes in our administration including a new principal, assistant principal, and superintendent. Our town voted not to consolidate last year and we are now dealing with the repercussions of that. All of these factors compounded has left the teaching staff feeling overwhelmed and frustrated. In addition to these things, we are dealing with new curriculum development and our superintendent is looking at standards based education instead of dividing kids by age. I guess so much is "up in the air" or "in progress" that I am not sure whether I am facing forwards or backwards.
Seeing other teachers in my EDC 533 class talk about their schools and how well everyone works together toward a common goal makes me a little jealous. I wish our school could get to that point. I think we can, but there are several large roadblocks that we need to overcome first.
In terms of our curriculum, we have a curriculum coordinator and a new curriculum binder as of last year. It was developed before Union 90 was disintegrated by consolidation and we were left on our own (by the choice of townspeople). Being a new teacher, I was excited to have something concrete to refer to but have been disappointed with what the binder has supplied me with. It is vague and hard to follow. It seems like the learning result are put in the binder and it is still up to me to decide how to get the students proficient in what they need to know. Although I enjoy the freedom and the ability to be creative, I worry that my students are not getting a full education because of the holes in our curriculum.
I guess I would have to say that on the surface, my school is "regular", but once you dig down a layer or two, we are seriously lacking some things that could make us better.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)